It’s a cautionary primer on how Trump thinks the news media should cover him, and how media lords should behave toward him.

I’ll give you the short version: David Pecker, the top man at the trashy supermarket tabloid, and chief executive of the parent company that is ambitious to expand its media reach, is the quintessential Trump lickspittle bent on expanding the Trump brand.

Nary a negative syllable about Trump is ever permitted in its pages.

As a former Enquirer staffer recalls, “David thought Donald walked on water. Donald treated David like a little puppy. Donald liked being flattered and David thought Donald was the king. Both have similar management styles, similar attitudes, starting with absolute superiority over everybody else.”

A former senior executive says that Pecker and Trump “have an agreement where David would not write anything that damages Donald.” Another says that “if Donald didn’t want a story to run, it wouldn’t run. You can put that in stone.”

Indeed, as the article points out, “early in the 2016 campaign Pecker simply turned over the pages of the Enquirer to Trump, allowing the candidate to write columns under his own byline” — and attacking Trump’s rivals, most notably Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, who was slimed as a philanderer and whose father was supposedly outed for supposedly helping to assassinate President John F. Kennedy.

All told, “We used to go after newsmakers no matter what side they were on,” another former Enquirer staffer points out, “and Trump is a guy who was running for president with a closet full of baggage. He’s the ultimate target-rich environment. The Enquirer had a golden opportunity, and they completely looked the other way.”

The timing of this New Yorker article couldn’t be better. Remember last month, when Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski said that the Enquirer recently ginned up a trashy story about them, and that the White House promised to get the story killed if the Morning Joe duo apologized for their critical remarks about Trump?

The White House denied the blackmail allegation, but it rang a bell when I read the new article. Ten years ago, the Enquirer was preparing to run a sex tryst story about Tiger Woods, but it agreed to kill the story after Woods agreed to pose for the cover of Men’s Fitness, another magazine owned by Pecker’s company.

By this point, you might be wondering why we should bother to care about the Enquirer.

Roughly 100,000,000 people are exposed to the Enquirer each week at 200,000 checkout lines, and its pro-Trump attitude reinforces its readers’ support for Trump (according to Pecker, “They voted for Trump, and 96 percent want him re-elected today. These are white working people ... They know him from 14 seasons of The Apprentice.”).

Pecker also owns sister tabloids, like the Globe, whose readers are typically in their 60s, and who, according to Pecker, “love to read the worst possible horrible things you could read about Hillary.”

But most important, Pecker is reportedly in play to potentially buy the financially ailing Time Inc. magazines — TIME, People and Fortune.

In other words, Pecker may be poised to give Trump what he wants most: obsequious coverage on a far broader scale.

As the New Yorker article points out, “That’s what happened when Pecker bought Us Weekly, which has heretofore largely been apolitical in its orientation. In one of the early issues of Us Weekly under Pecker’s leadership, the magazine ran a fawning cover story about Ivanka Trump. ‘Balancing her personal ideals with love and loyalty to her father,’ the cover said, ‘the president’s daughter will always fight for what she believes in.’”

This is Trump’s blueprint for the American news media, for a First Amendment stripped of its accountability ethos and replaced by Putinesque servitude. And now he’s overseas, trashing the free and independent press.

Feel free to ponder the irony that the National Enquirer, with its fake-news heritage, is Trump’s idea of “objectivity.”

Welcome to Noozhawk Asks, a new feature in which you ask the questions, you help decide what Noozhawk investigates, and you work with us to find the answers.

Here’s how it works: You share your questions with us in the nearby box. In some cases, we may work with you to find the answers. In others, we may ask you to vote on your top choices to help us narrow the scope. And we’ll be regularly asking you for your feedback on a specific issue or topic.

We also expect to work together with the reader who asked the winning questions to find the answer together. Noozhawk’s objective is to come at questions from a place of curiosity and openness, and we believe a transparent collaboration is the key to achieve it.

The results of our investigation will be published here in this Noozhawk Asks section. Once or twice a month, we plan to do a review of what was asked and answered.

Support Noozhawk Today

You are an important ally in our mission to deliver clear, objective, high-quality professional news reporting for Santa Barbara, Goleta and the rest of Santa Barbara County. Join the Hawks Club today to help keep Noozhawk soaring.

We offer four membership levels: $5 a month, $10 a month, $25 a month or $1 a week. Payments can be made through PayPal below, or click here for information on recurring credit-card payments.

Thank you for your vital support.

Reader Comments

Noozhawk is no longer accepting reader comments on our articles. Click here for the announcement. Readers are instead invited to submit letters to the editor by emailing them to [email protected]. Please provide your full name and community, as well as contact information for verification purposes only.